For some elected officials in Missouri, it is not enough that a vote of the people to strengthen the state’s breeding regulation was gutted later by the state legislature; now they want to further weaken anti-cruelty regulations and make it tougher for people to vote for better regulations.
Rep. Tom Loehner is backing an amendment to the state constitution that would forbid voter-enacted laws governing how farmers raise cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry, goats, horses and rabbits. He said his proposal is driven by concern that people in urban areas might construe some farming practices as cruel instead of economically necessary.
That is a troubling statement – “cruel instead of economically necessary.” It’s bad enough to pick and choose where they don’t want the will of the people involved. But to weigh the extreme suffering of animals against what a few will deem as ‘economically necessary’ should sound alarm bells for the animal welfare side and voters in general.
Bahr suggests the provision in Proposition B to limit the number of breeding dogs a breeders can possess to 50 is unconstitutional. Bahr and others who are clueless on the US Constitution, try to state these limits are a violation of property rights.
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon’s compromise on the proposed repeal of key components of Proposition B is losing support from both sides – with headlines Wednesday using the phrases “crumbling” and “threatened.”
A group of 65 state lawmakers who backed a new bill (SB 113) to gut Prop B are calling on Nixon to drop the compromise and sign SB 113. And Although the Missouri Humane Society supports and compromise, other national animal-welfare groups are opposing it, including the Humane Society of the United States.
The effort to repeal many of the important provision in Missouri’s Prop B took a twisting turn today when Governor Jay Nixon announced a possible compromise – “between state-level animal-welfare groups and Missouri dog breeders.”
A brand new Pack of Putrid Punditry Award goes to Missouri Farmers Care, described as “a coalition of leading Missouri agriculture advocacy groups” by a piece of warped propaganda posted on the website – DairyHerd.com.
The group falsely claims that the bill recorded as SB 113 – which guts the anti-puppy mill measure Proposition B – actually strengthens the enforcement of Missouri’s animal welfare laws and preserves the voters’ intent on Prop B.
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon has a decision to make – sign the bill to gut Proposition B or go the humane route and veto the bill. Vetoing the bill will ensure that protections remain in place, to allow for time outside and for better housing for breeding dogs housed in puppy mills.
In reading and reporting on the potentially tragic efforts to overturn Missouri’s Proposition B, I’ve been thinking about what provisions all breeding regulations – from federal and state levels should contain.
I feel there are some basic protections that should be afforded to all breeding dogs. So let’s work together – as a pack – to put on the table the core provisions.